As outlined in the commentary on §708-830, one of the principal reasons for the consolidation of various related common-law and statutory offenses under the single theft statute is to eliminate pointless procedural obstacles in prosecution. The possibility of quashing a theft indictment because of variance would substantially pervert the virtue of simplicity which such consolidation seeks to achieve. Subject only to the court's power to ensure a fair trial (e.g., to ensure that the accused has adequate time and information to prepare a defense), any charge of theft may be proved by demonstration, beyond a reasonable doubt, that the accused's actions came within the definition of one of the subsections of §708-830.[1]

§708-835 Commentary:

1. See generally, M.P.C., Tentative Draft No. 1, Appendix A at 101-109 (1953).